I'm always surprised by the differences of opinion on some plays when we're all watching the same thing, but at the end of the day I appreciate everyone's perspective.

Two points from someone who played wing in hockey my entire life and always forechecked hard (due to a lack of scoring touch and frequent role on the checking line).

1. You always travel 'a long ways' when you come in on the forecheck. That whole thing doesn't even make sense to me. Should you stop for a rest when you get to the circle? I'm mean you start skating hard in the neutral zone, time your crossing of the blueline with the puck, and sprint hard to get to the end boards. You're not lining up a hit the whole time -- you're chasing the puck. But if the puck gets moved, you finish your check. You don't stop and then try to hit someone standing still. You use your momentum. I know what charging is. Just because you come 'a long way' on a forecheck doesn't make any subsequent hit a charge.

2. When coming in for any collision, with speed, you take your weight off your feet at the point of contact. If you don't, then you will probably buckle your knee like Boychuk did. If you launch yourself into the hit or come flying in through the air, then that is a charge. But you have to take your feet off the ice for that collision, you simply can't plant them.

I think charging is one of the most nebulous calls on the rulebooks, but you usually know it when you see it. I think Paille's speed was a basic function of forechecking, not an attempt to make a long distance run at a stationary opponent. I think his feet coming off the ice were the basic function of a collision at that speed, not an attempt to launch into an oppenent. It actually looked like he a let up a little to me.

Put yourself back on skates, in a game, and tell me how you avoid that hit on the forecheck, when your role is all about speed, hustle, and forechecking.

I'm always surprised by the differences of opinion on some plays when we're all watching the same thing, but at the end of the day I appreciate everyone's perspective. Two points from someone who played wing in hockey my entire life and always forechecked hard (due to a lack of scoring touch and frequent role on the checking line). 1. You always travel 'a long ways' when you come in on the forecheck. That whole thing doesn't even make sense to me. Should you stop for a rest when you get to the circle? I'm mean you start skating hard in the neutral zone, time your crossing of the blueline with the puck, and sprint hard to get to the end boards. You're not lining up a hit the whole time -- you're chasing the puck. But if the puck gets moved, you finish your check. You don't stop and then try to hit someone standing still. You use your momentum. I know what charging is. Just because you come 'a long way' on a forecheck doesn't make any subsequent hit a charge. 2. When coming in for any collision, with speed, you take your weight off your feet at the point of contact. If you don't, then you will probably buckle your knee like Paille did. If you launch yourself into the hit or come flying in through the air, then that is a charge. But you have to take your feet off the ice for that collision, you simply can't plant them. I think charging is one of the most nebulous calls on the rulebooks, but you usually know it when you see it. I think Paille's speed was a basic function of forechecking, not an attempt to make a long distance run at a stationary opponent. I think his feet coming off the ice were the basic function of a collision at that speed, not an attempt to launch into an oppenent. It actually looked like he a let up a little to me. Put yourself back on skates, in a game, and tell me how you avoid that hit on the forecheck, when your role is all about speed, hustle, and forechecking.Posted by Fletcher1

Well said Fletch. I agree with what you're pointing out and what you saw on the Paille hit.

I'm always surprised by the differences of opinion on some plays when we're all watching the same thing, but at the end of the day I appreciate everyone's perspective. Two points from someone who played wing in hockey my entire life and always forechecked hard (due to a lack of scoring touch and frequent role on the checking line). 1. You always travel 'a long ways' when you come in on the forecheck. That whole thing doesn't even make sense to me. Should you stop for a rest when you get to the circle? I'm mean you start skating hard in the neutral zone, time your crossing of the blueline with the puck, and sprint hard to get to the end boards. You're not lining up a hit the whole time -- you're chasing the puck. But if the puck gets moved, you finish your check. You don't stop and then try to hit someone standing still. You use your momentum. I know what charging is. Just because you come 'a long way' on a forecheck doesn't make any subsequent hit a charge. 2. When coming in for any collision, with speed, you take your weight off your feet at the point of contact. If you don't, then you will probably buckle your knee like Paille did. If you launch yourself into the hit or come flying in through the air, then that is a charge. But you have to take your feet off the ice for that collision, you simply can't plant them. I think charging is one of the most nebulous calls on the rulebooks, but you usually know it when you see it. I think Paille's speed was a basic function of forechecking, not an attempt to make a long distance run at a stationary opponent. I think his feet coming off the ice were the basic function of a collision at that speed, not an attempt to launch into an oppenent. It actually looked like he a let up a little to me. Put yourself back on skates, in a game, and tell me how you avoid that hit on the forecheck, when your role is all about speed, hustle, and forechecking.Posted by Fletcher1

Fletch, I bring it up all the time that players need to turn and lead with the hip (ala Caron or Bergeron). By doing so, you end up with a follow through that goes right through a players mid-section. Lunging for a shoulder hit leads to your feet leaving the ice and possible contact with the head.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Fletch, I bring it up all the time that players need to turn and lead with the hip (ala Caron or Bergeron). By doing so, you end up with a follow through that goes right through a players mid-section. Lunging for a shoulder hit leads to your feet leaving the ice and possible contact with the head.Posted by dezaruchi

Well I certainly agree with that as a general rule of thumb dez, and I love the hip check. I just thought in this case, Paille did a very good job of not launching high or hitting the head. That was a body check.

The combination of leaving your feet and going high with the hit is what the real danger is. Look to the infamous Aaron Rome hit -- he leaves his feet similar to Paille but the primary point of contact is the face. He launches into the hit and targets the head. If he leaves his feet but delivers the hit shoulder on shoulder then it is no big deal (aside from also being really late in that case).

I can sympathize with what Paille is trying to do on the forecheck. Been there a thousand times.

I'm always surprised by the differences of opinion on some plays when we're all watching the same thing, but at the end of the day I appreciate everyone's perspective. Two points from someone who played wing in hockey my entire life and always forechecked hard (due to a lack of scoring touch and frequent role on the checking line). 1. You always travel 'a long ways' when you come in on the forecheck. That whole thing doesn't even make sense to me. Should you stop for a rest when you get to the circle? I'm mean you start skating hard in the neutral zone, time your crossing of the blueline with the puck, and sprint hard to get to the end boards. You're not lining up a hit the whole time -- you're chasing the puck. But if the puck gets moved, you finish your check. You don't stop and then try to hit someone standing still. You use your momentum. I know what charging is. Just because you come 'a long way' on a forecheck doesn't make any subsequent hit a charge. 2. When coming in for any collision, with speed, you take your weight off your feet at the point of contact. If you don't, then you will probably buckle your knee like Boychuk did. If you launch yourself into the hit or come flying in through the air, then that is a charge. But you have to take your feet off the ice for that collision, you simply can't plant them. I think charging is one of the most nebulous calls on the rulebooks, but you usually know it when you see it. I think Paille's speed was a basic function of forechecking, not an attempt to make a long distance run at a stationary opponent. I think his feet coming off the ice were the basic function of a collision at that speed, not an attempt to launch into an oppenent. It actually looked like he a let up a little to me. Put yourself back on skates, in a game, and tell me how you avoid that hit on the forecheck, when your role is all about speed, hustle, and forechecking.Posted by Fletcher1

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Fletch, I bring it up all the time that players need to turn and lead with the hip (ala Caron or Bergeron). By doing so, you end up with a follow through that goes right through a players mid-section. Lunging for a shoulder hit leads to your feet leaving the ice and possible contact with the head.Posted by dezaruchi

Good point Dez, but in that play normally if a player turns to throw his hip into player, in my opinion he risks losing sight of the puck.

As for the distance part when a puck is usually deep in the other end you usually have a player coming a long distance as it is, either from Neutral zone or a line change. And he's usually coming with speed. As I said with the Chimera hit, both players were coming in on the forecheck, with zero intent to injure. Their only intent was to do their job. Now if Niskanen turned at the last second, no way you can blame Paille. That is on the defender, he knows the player is coming, I wasnt there, but I'd bet my life that Johnson told him so.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Well I certainly agree with that as a general rule of thumb dez, and I love the hip check. I just thought in this case, Paille did a very good job of not launching high or hitting the head. That was a body check. The combination of leaving your feet and going high with the hit is what the real danger is. Look to the infamous Aaron Rome hit -- he leaves his feet similar to Paille but the primary point of contact is the face. He launches into the hit and targets the head. If he leaves his feet but delivers the hit shoulder on shoulder then it is no big deal (aside from also being really late in that case). I can sympathize with what Paille is trying to do on the forecheck. Been there a thousand times.Posted by Fletcher1

Me too Fletch. On the same note, I know there's a very fine line between a clean, huge hit and charge. I've been on both ends of these hits plenty of times. To take it a step further, while I think Paille deserved 2 on the play, I have no problem with him doing it. I'm fine with a guy taking 2 for being aggressive and landing a big hit. I hate penalties for face washes and grabbing shirts like Thornton took against the NYR's. If you're taking a penalty then make sure the guy felt it.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Good point Dez, but in that play normally if a player turns to throw his hip into player, in my opinion he risks losing sight of the puck. As for the distance part when a puck is usually deep in the other end you usually have a player coming a long distance as it is, either from Neutral zone or a line change. And he's usually coming with speed. As I said with the Chimera hit, both players were coming in on the forecheck, with zero intent to injure. Their only intent was to do their job. Now if Niskanen turned at the last second, no way you can blame Paille. That is on the defender, he knows the player is coming, I wasnt there, but I'd bet my life that Johnson told him so.Posted by kelvana33

Kel, I'm starting to realize that maybe not all players are capable of doing it. It's a subtle 2 step pivot that you do a split-second before contact yet most players attempt the straight on shoulder hit which is also more dangerous for the hitter too. Ray Bourque was fantastic at doing it. It might be already too late but there needs to be a push to teach proper body contact at a grass roots level.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Kel, I'm starting to realize that maybe not all players are capable of doing it. It's a subtle 2 step pivot that you do a split-second before contact yet most players attempt the straight on shoulder hit which is also more dangerous for the hitter too. Ray Bourque was fantastic at doing it. It might be already too late but there needs to be a push to teach proper body contact at a grass roots level.Posted by dezaruchi

Sweeney was pretty good at it too, in fact he was pretty good at avoiding contact all together. Wonder where he got that from?

Looking at those replays last night.........sure didn't look good. Saw both his ankle and knee flex awkwardly. I'll be shocked if he's not out for some time, and that's not good. They need John Boy back there.....

Can't find a video, but he didn't leave his feet before impact. He came cruising in like a missile and nailed him with a clean body check and they both went flying. He doesn't need to leave his feet for charging, he just has to travel a long distance before the hit. It was a borderline call that absolutely wouldn't have been called last year. I'm OK with the league calling charging more like they did in the old days to help battle injuries, but they really should send out a memo to the players. In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done :Posted by OatesCam

Exactly, thank you. I could see if the puck was long gone and he left his feet, but that wasn't the case.

It was a texbook hit. I don't see it as borderline myself. I see it more as very sensitive refs taking cues for a horrendous commissioner in Gary Bettman. Fire Bettman.

I agree with Fletch as well. When you hit someone and clean them out, their body mass disappears, which brings you off the ice.

Too funny now a player cannot come from a long way to make a hit. What does that even mean ? Completely ridiculous ! If player A has the puck, player B is allowed to hit so long it's not from behind , leave the ice for the hit or principle point of contact is the head.In this case the ref made a mistake, it happened fast and he missed it. Refs also make mistakes.

Too funny now a player cannot come from a long way to make a hit. Completely ridiculous ! If player A has the puck, player B is allowed to hit so long it's not from behind , leave the ice for the hit or principle point of contact is the head. In this case the ref made a mistake, it happened fast and he missed it. Refs also make mistakes.Posted by BsLegion

There has always been consideration around how far away you can target a hit. I would know I got called constantly for charging growing up.

I think a 2 minute minor was a good call. The Letang dive thereafter is awful but I would have the ref's make that call consistently. Not as a major or anything else but a 2minute minor she was.

I havent seen it since last night but it looked like Paille was still pumping 2 steps before the hit, which is imo a rule of thumb for charging penalties.

I'll even take it a step further and say that open ice, this is 100% clean. Below the goal line it is much more dangerous for both players and IMO this should be written into the rule books.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : There has always been consideration around how far away you can target a hit. I would know I got called constantly for charging growing up. I think a 2 minute minor was a good call. The Letang dive thereafter is awful but I would have the ref's make that call consistently. Not as a major or anything else but a 2minute minor she was. I havent seen it since last night but it looked like Paille was still pumping 2 steps before the hit, which is imo a rule of thumb for charging penalties. I'll even take it a step further and say that open ice, this is 100% clean. Below the goal line it is much more dangerous for both players and IMO this should be written into the rule books.Posted by I-Like-Hockey

So did Chris Neals hit on Boychuk , he comes from a way out to line him up but he hits him square in the chest. No charge , clean hit.what's a long way ?

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : So did Chris Neals hit on Boychuk , he comes from a way out to line him up but he hits him square in the chest. No charge , clean hit. what's a long way ?Posted by BsLegion

I said in the bottom of my post that I think open ice this is ok, as long as it doesn't violate other rules. These hits always get ruled on more strictly by refs when they happen along the boards/below the goal line.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : So did Chris Neals hit on Boychuk , he comes from a way out to line him up but he hits him square in the chest. No charge , clean hit. what's a long way ?Posted by BsLegion

lol

It's interesting to see who played hockey and who didn't here. All of a sudden a "long way" is charging.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : lol You've played hockey You've been to the old garden You listened to Cusick You know it all. Seriously, go argue on the Pats Forum. Get lost.Posted by kelvana33

I dont get it. Is he saying I never played hockey so I dont know what I'm talking about?

I thought I was pretty concise in my post. I dont know who this is but the cocky attitude is pretty annoying just from this thread.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : I dont get it. Is he saying I never played hockey so I dont know what I'm talking about? I thought I was pretty concise in my post. I dont know who this is but the cocky attitude is pretty annoying just from this thread.Posted by I-Like-Hockey

Argues with everybody, nobody knows as much as him. He can tell whos played the game, who knows more about Bruins etc.. only he's been proven wrong numerous times. Just like when he compared the Boychuk/Asham collsion to the Samuelsson hit on Neely.

In Response to Re: Well, Boychuk is Done : Argues with everybody, nobody knows as much as him. He can tell whos played the game, who knows more about Bruins etc.. only he's been proven wrong numerous times. Just like when he compared the Boychuk/Asham collsion to the Samuelsson hit on Neely. Incapable of carrying on a normal discussion.Posted by kelvana33

Different views that's all it is. Some explain themsleves in a different matter.I don't always agree with your or ILH's comments and express my view . Who cares .... I , we read what you write anyway.Cheers!